DOCSLIB.ORG

Portland Aerial Tram Portland, Oregon

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Portland Aerial Tram Portland, Oregon PORTLAND AERIAL TRAM PORTLAND, OREGON Body Panel Dislocation Incident Incident Date: December 4 th , 2018 Investigation Dates: December 11 th & 12 th , 2018 Portland Tram Incident Report Project Information Project: Portland Aerial Tram Prepared for: City of Portland Richard Eisenhauer, Program Manager Bureau of Transportation 1120 S.W. 5 th Ave. Portland, OR 92704 [email protected] Reviewing Agency Jurisdiction : City of Portland Project Representative Prepared by : Ridgeline Engineering Company 1600 Washington Ave. #2 Golden, CO 80401 303.482.3186 rdgline.com Contact : Joel Deis , P.E. (303) 482-3186 Project Reference: #006.00 6 Revisions: 1. 10 January 2019 – Revised narrative in sections 4 & 5 to reflect current design methodology. Changed image in figure 10 to show new and old tether components. 2. 15 April 2019 – Updated several photos, changed narrative in multiple sections. Ridgeline Engineering Company April 2019 Portland Aerial Tram Body Panel Dislocation Incident The technical material and data contained in this document were prepared under the supervision and direction of the undersigned, whose seal, as a professional engineer licensed to practice as such, is affixed below. 04/15/2019 Expires: 12/31/19 Prepared by Joel Deis , P.E. SCOPE OF INSPECTION The word inspection in this report refers to a visual inspection of the as-built condition of the tramway at the time of our site visit. Evaluation of the existing structure requires that certain assumptions be made regarding conditions existing at the time of the described failure. Elements that could not be observed are excluded from this report. Therefore, this report reflects the findings of our inspection after the described failure and our professional analysis of that failure, but is not intended to be a definitive and certain explanation of the causes of the failure nor a guaranty that such a failure will not occur in the future. Our inspection was performed in a manner consistent with the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the same profession currently practicing under similar circumstances. Ridgeline makes no warranty, certification, or guarantee, express or implied, as to its professional services rendered in the creation of this report. Ridgeline Engineering Company April 2019 Portland Aerial Tram Body Panel Dislocation Incident TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 2 2. Description of System ................................................................................................. 2 3. Analysis of Failure ...................................................................................................... 5 4. Document Review and Maintenance Procedures ........................................................ 8 5. Remediation ............................................................................................................... 8 6. Interim Operations ..................................................................................................... 9 7. Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 9 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A – Observation Photos Appendix B – Doppelmayr Incident Report Ridgeline Engineering Company 1 January 2019 Portland Aerial Tram Body Panel Dislocation Incident 1. INTRODUCTION On December 4 th , 2018 at 11:52 AM the uphill roof panel from Cabin #2 of the Portland Aerial Tramway fell during a trip. The panel landed on the staircase of the bridge located below and struck a pedestrian. The pedestrian was treated for minor injuries at the scene and refused additional medical care. The purpose of this report is to document the circumstances that led up to this event and what measures should be taken to prevent a situation like this from occurring again in the future. 2. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM The Portland Aerial Tramway first went into service in December of 2006 to assist the transportation of staff, patients and visitors of Oregon Health Sciences University (OHSU). Additionally, the system was designed to move the general public and is owned by the Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT). This system is unique in that it was constructed not only to be an integral part of the City’s transportation system, it is also a landmark with several architectural features designed to improve the aesthetics of the system. One of these features is the overall shape of the cabins. Typically, aerial tramway cabins have a rectangular profile rather than the curved shape of the cabins in this system. Examples of two different cabins can be seen below: Figure 1 – Portland Tram Cabin (Left); “Typical” Rectangular Tram Cabin (Right) Ridgeline Engineering Company 2 April 2019 Portland Aerial Tram Body Panel Dislocation Incident The cabins for the Portland Aerial Tram were designed and manufactured by Gangloff Cabins in Switzerland. Their construction is unique in that they are essentially a rectangular cabin, similar to a more typical installation, with decorative paneling wrapped around to give them their unique shape. Figure 2 & Figure 3 below show a cabin in service and what the top looks like with the paneling removed. Figure 2 – Portland Tram Cabin Figure 3 – Tram Cabin from Above with Decorative Paneling and Hangar Arm Removed Ridgeline Engineering Company 3 April 2019 Portland Aerial Tram Body Panel Dislocation Incident On December 4 th , 2018 one of these decorative panels came free from the cabin and fell to the ground. Figure 4 below shows Cabin #2, the one involved in the incident, with the panel that fell removed. Figure 4 - Cabin #2 With Panel Removed Ridgeline Engineering Company 4 April 2019 Portland Aerial Tram Body Panel Dislocation Incident 3. ANALYSIS OF FAILURE For one of the decorative panels to fall from the cabin the panel latch and tether system must fail. Each panel is held in place by multiple spring latches and two tethers, therefore a panel cannot disengage unless both the spring latches and the tethers fail at the same time. The panel in question includes 8 latches distributed around the perimeter of the panel shown in Figure 5 below. The latches that failed during the incident are removed from the panel and can be seen in Figure 6. Figure 5 - Panel Removed from Cabin; Latch Locations Circled in Red Figure 6 – Spring Latches Removed from Panel Ridgeline Engineering Company 5 April 2019 Portland Aerial Tram Body Panel Dislocation Incident While it is impossible to conclusively say why the panel was pulled from the cabin, based on the information that was observed during our visit, it seems that the most likely reason the panel came loose was from lack of stiffness of the panel. Wind traveling over a panel of this shape produces an uplift force. This uplift force causes the panel to flex upward which in turn causes the sides of the panel to pull inward. As the sides move inward the contact area between the latches and their attachment to the cabin goes down until the point where they completely lose contact and the panel is pulled from the cabin. A schematic illustration of this situation can be seen below in Figure 7. Figure 7 - Schematic of Panel Latch Failure; Clouded Area Shows where Latches Lost Contact with Cabin Ridgeline Engineering Company 6 April 2019 Portland Aerial Tram Body Panel Dislocation Incident The incident report provided by Doppelmayr, the tram operator, states that the wind was gusting as high as 38 mph at the time of failure. Considering this wind speed, and the formulas for calculating wind pressure in ASCE7-10, the estimated uplift force from the wind at the time of the incident was just under 500 pounds. Applying this force to our 3D stress analysis model of the panel produced the following result: Figure 8 – Diagram of Deflected Roof Panel Under Load; Original Panel Shape in Gray, Deflected Shape in Colored Plot, Deformations Exaggerated for Clarity The cabin manufacturer provided a tether system to catch the panels in the event that they came loose from the cabin. The size of the hardware used in the system indicates that the tether was likely designed to prevent the panel from falling to the ground if a technician were to accidentally drop it during maintenance. The design of the hardware was inadequate to restrain the wind forces on the panel during the incident. Images of the tether system, including the carabiner that failed can be seen in the following figures. Figure 9 – Original Caribiner (Left); Recovered Portion of Broken Carabiner (Right) Ridgeline Engineering Company 7 April 2019 Portland Aerial Tram Body Panel Dislocation Incident Figure 10 – Original Steel Cable Tether with Locking Chain Link (Above); Temporary Tether (Below) 4. DOCUMENT REVIEW AND MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES Gangloff, the cabin manufacturer, did not provide any maintenance procedures or inspection criteria for the tram cabins. As such, the operations and maintenance documents do not provide any guidance for PBOT or Doppelmayr, the tram operator, to follow. Currently, there is no documentation in place that specifically details when the panel attachment to the cabin was last inspected. It should be noted, however, that other maintenance procedures that are currently in place require the removal and reinstallation of these panels at least twice per month. The frequency of the panels being indirectly inspected through other maintenance activities points towards a design failure
Load more

Recommended publications
  • White Paper: Urban Application of Aerial Cableway Technology
    WHITE PAPER: URBAN APPLICATION OF AERIAL CABLEWAY TECHNOLOGY WSP USA | June 2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WSP USA is pleased to present the following white paper that summarizes the benefits and items for consideration of aerial cableway technology; outlines the project development process; and addresses advantages, costs and challenges associated with developing aerial cableway systems in urban environments. Urban applications of aerial cableway technology have been successfully integrated into transit networks in numerous cities around the globe, including the Portland Aerial Tram (Portland, Oregon) and Roosevelt Island Tram (New York, NY). Interest in aerial cableway technology has grown considerably in the United States in recent years, and initial feasibility studies have been completed in several U.S. cities, including San Diego, CA; Washington DC; and Brooklyn, NY. WSP is evaluating aerial cableway technology as an innovative first- and last-mile connection to regional transit in urban areas. Aerial cableway technology offers multiple benefits, including: relatively lower costs compared to other transportation modes, the ability to overcome significant changes in topography and other obstacles in natural and man-made environments, the ability to bypass congested roadways and transportation corridors, the ability to move high volumes of passengers: the equivalent of one city bus every minute, a streamlined design that fits into the urban environment, the potential to integrate transit-oriented development (TOD) near stations, and the ability to provide service between residential areas and key destinations. Many of these benefits have been realized in existing systems in La Paz, Bolivia, and Medellin, Colombia. Specifically, Medellin’s Line K transports more than 40,000 passengers per day between residential areas and the city center, reducing some commute times from more than an hour to approximately 10 minutes.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report (PDF)
    Andrew M. Cuomo Board of Directors Governor Darryl C. Towns, Chairperson Charlene M. Indelicato Fay Fryer Christian Dr. Katherine Teets Grimm President/Chief Executive Officer David Kraut Donald D. Lewis Robert L. Megna Vice President/General Counsel Roosevelt Island Operating Corporation of the State of New York Howard Polivy Steven Chironis 591 Main Street, Roosevelt Island, NY 10044 Michael Shinozaki Vice President/Chief Financial Officer T: (212) 832-4540 • F: (212) 832-4582 Margaret Smith http://rioc.ny.gov THE ROOSEVELT ISLAND OPERATING CORPORATION Public Authority Annual Report Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2013 Background The Roosevelt Island Operating Corporation of the State of New York ("RIOC") is a public benefit corporation and a political subdivision of the State of New York. RIOC was created by the New York State legislature, in 1984, to take responsibility, pursuant to a General Development Plan (GDP), for the development and operation of the 147 acres comprising the former Welfare Island, located in New York City's East River. RIOC assumed the role of the New York State Urban Development Corporation as lessee under a 99-year Master Lease (running until 2068) from the City of New York. The GDP, which has been amended from time to time, provides for the development of housing, shops and community facilities for a mixed income, handicap accessible, residential neighborhood. As an island community, Roosevelt Island requires specialized operations and capital infrastructure maintenance such as an aerial tramway, comprehensive garbage compacting system and seawall improvements. RIOC supplements the very basic services provided by the City of New York, and provides specialized operations and capital improvements.
    [Show full text]
  • Code of Colorado Regulations 1 and Lifts, Surface Lifts and Tows - Safety Requirements
    DEPARTMENT OF REGULATORY AGENCIES Passenger Tramway Safety Board PASSENGER TRAMWAYS 3 CCR 718-1 [Editor’s Notes follow the text of the rules at the end of this CCR Document.] _______________________________________________________________________________ Rule 0.1 Preamble and incorporation by reference. Section 25-5-704(1)(a) of the Colorado Revised Statutes allows the Colorado Passenger Tramway Safety Board (“Board”) to “use as general guidelines the standards contained in the 'American Standard Safety Code for Aerial Passenger Tramways', as adopted by the American Standards Association, Incorporated, as amended from time to time.” Since 1965, when this provision was enacted, the American Standards Association, Inc., has been succeeded by the American National Standards Institute, Inc. and the American Standard Safety Code updated. The relevant publications are now known as the “American National Standard for Passenger Ropeways – Aerial Tramways, Aerial Lifts, Surface Lifts, Tows and Conveyors – Safety Requirements” (“ANSI B77.1-2011”) and the “American National Standard for Funiculars – Safety Requirements” (“ANSI B77.2-2004”). The Board adopts and incorporates by reference, with certain additions, revisions, and deletions, the ANSI standards as listed below: B77.1-1960 June 8, 1960 USA standard Safety Code for Aerial Passenger Tramways B77.1a-1963 July 1, 1963 Addenda to USA standard Safety Code for Aerial Passenger Tramways B77.1b-1965 July 26, 1965 Addenda to USA standard Safety Code for Aerial Passenger Tramways B77.1-1970 March
    [Show full text]
  • TCQSM Part 8
    Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual—2nd Edition PART 8 GLOSSARY This part of the manual presents definitions for the various transit terms discussed and referenced in the manual. Other important terms related to transit planning and operations are included so that this glossary can serve as a readily accessible and easily updated resource for transit applications beyond the evaluation of transit capacity and quality of service. As a result, this glossary includes local definitions and local terminology, even when these may be inconsistent with formal usage in the manual. Many systems have their own specific, historically derived, terminology: a motorman and guard on one system can be an operator and conductor on another. Modal definitions can be confusing. What is clearly light rail by definition may be termed streetcar, semi-metro, or rapid transit in a specific city. It is recommended that in these cases local usage should prevail. AADT — annual average daily ATP — automatic train protection. AADT—accessibility, transit traffic; see traffic, annual average ATS — automatic train supervision; daily. automatic train stop system. AAR — Association of ATU — Amalgamated Transit Union; see American Railroads; see union, transit. Aorganizations, Association of American Railroads. AVL — automatic vehicle location system. AASHTO — American Association of State AW0, AW1, AW2, AW3 — see car, weight Highway and Transportation Officials; see designations. organizations, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. absolute block — see block, absolute. AAWDT — annual average weekday traffic; absolute permissive block — see block, see traffic, annual average weekday. absolute permissive. ABS — automatic block signal; see control acceleration — increase in velocity per unit system, automatic block signal.
    [Show full text]
  • Aerial Cableways As Urban Public Transport Systems
    CERTU STRMTG PPCI transports du quotidien PCI Interface voirie et transports collectifs CETE Aerial cableways as urban transport systems December 2011 AERIAL CABLEWAYS AS URBAN PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEMS Certu – STRMTG - CETE - December 2011 2/14 AERIAL CABLEWAYS AS URBAN PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEMS Cable transport systems are effectively absent from the urban and suburban public transport landscape in France, where gondola lifts and aerial tramways remain essentially perceived as systems for the transport of skiers in winter sports resorts. Cable systems can, however, be used in urban areas. Europe has a number of ground-based systems (such as funiculars in cities including Lyon, Barcelona, Innsbruck and Le Havre amongst other locations) and a small number of cable cars, largely aimed at the tourist market (for example in Barcelona, Cologne and Lisbon). Several metropolitan areas (Medellín, Caracas, Rio de Janeiro, Portland, New York, Algiers and others) have even incorporated gondolas and aerial tramways into their public transport networks. Emblematic projects such as these can provide an effective urban transport solution. In France, the law1 identifies cable systems as one of the alternatives that could offer an efficient solution as part of a policy of reducing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. And some cable transport projects are currently being run by local authorities. The context in which cable systems operate, what needs do they meet and what are the costs involved in their development are fundamental questions local authorities must address. This formed the framework for a study undertaken by Ministry of Transport to be published early in 2012. This document provides a summary of this study.
    [Show full text]
  • Aerial Tramway Sustainable Monitoring with an Outdoor Low-Cost Efficient Wireless Intelligent Sensor
    sustainability Article Aerial Tramway Sustainable Monitoring with an Outdoor Low-Cost Efficient Wireless Intelligent Sensor Rafael Cardona Huerta 1 , Fernando Moreu 2,* and Jose Antonio Lozano Galant 3 1 Center for Intelligent Infrastructure, Research Engineer, 202 Engineering Research Laboratory, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Missouri Science and Technology, 500 W 16th Street, Rolla, MO 65409, USA; [email protected] 2 Centennial Engineering Center 3056, Department of Civil Engineering, University of New Mexico, MSC01 1070, Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA 3 Civil Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering of Ciudad Real, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Ed. Politecnico Camilo Jose Cela, 13071 Ciudad Real, Spain; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-505-277-1784 Abstract: Infrastructures such as aerial tramways carry unique traffic operations and have specific maintenance requirements that demand constant attention. It is common that old structures lack any type of automatization or monitoring systems, relying only on human judgment. Owners are interested in implementing techniques that assist them in making maintenance decisions, but are reluctant to invest in expensive and complex technology. In this study, researchers discussed with the owners different options and proposed a sustainable and cost-efficient solution to monitor the Sandia Peak Tramway operations with just two strategically located acceleration sensors. To maximize the success options researchers worked with the owners and developed a sensor that satisfied their needs. A Low-cost Efficient Wireless Intelligent Sensor 4—Outdoors (LEWIS 4) was developed, tested and validated during the experiment. Two solar-powered units were installed by the tramway staff and Citation: Cardona Huerta, R.; recorded data for three days.
    [Show full text]
  • Compendium of Definitions and Acronyms for Rail Systems
    APTA STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM APTA STD-ADMIN-GL-001-19 GUIDELINES First Published June 20, 2019 American Public Transportation Association 1300 I Street NW, 12th Floor East, Washington, DC, 20005 Compendium of Definitions and Acronyms for Rail Systems Abstract: This compendium was developed by the Technical Services & Innovation Department and published by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) to provide a glossary of commonly used definitions and acronyms in documents such as standards, recommended practices, and guidelines, so there is consistency within the rail transportation industry. Summary: APTA, through its subsidiary the North American Transit Services Association (NATSA), develops standards, recommended practices and guidelines for the benefit of public rail transportation. These tasks are accomplished by working groups consisting of members from rail transit agencies, manufacturers, consultants, engineers and other interested groups. Through the development of these documents, working groups have created a wide array of terms and abbreviations, many with varying definitions. This compendium has been developed to standardize the usage of such definitions and acronyms as it relates to rail operations, maintenance practices, designs and specifications. This document is dynamic in nature in that, over time, additional definitions and acronyms will be included. It is APTA’s intention that the document be sufficiently expanded at some point in the future to provide common usage of terms encompassing all rail industry requirements. Scope and purpose: This compendium applies to all rail agencies that operate commuter rail, heavy rail (subway systems), light rail, streetcars, and trolleys. The usage of these definitions and acronyms are voluntary. Nevertheless, it is the desire of APTA that the rail industry apply these terms to all documents such as standards, recommended practices, standard operating practices, standard maintenance practices, rail agency policies and procedures, and agency rule books.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual—2Nd Edition PART
    Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual—2nd Edition PART 5 RAIL TRANSIT CAPACITY CONTENTS CHAPTER 1. RAIL CAPACITY FUNDAMENTALS................................................... 5-1 Overview .......................................................................................................................... 5-1 Line Capacity ...................................................................................................................5-2 Train Control and Signaling....................................................................................... 5-2 Dwell Time ................................................................................................................... 5-3 Operating Margin........................................................................................................ 5-3 Turnbacks ..................................................................................................................... 5-3 Junctions .......................................................................................................................5-4 Mode-Specific Issues ................................................................................................... 5-5 Person Capacity ............................................................................................................... 5-5 Loading Diversity........................................................................................................ 5-5 Number of Cars ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 3S Gondola Lifts 2|3 3S Gondola Lifts a Long List of Superlatives
    3S Gondola Lifts 2|3 3S Gondola Lifts A long list of superlatives Taking the long view, identifying trends, creating inno- which the carrier travels and a circulating haul rope vations – these are the strengths you can count on which is clamped to the carriages. This detachable as a Doppelmayr/Garaventa customer. With cutting- continuous movement system offers top performance edge ropeway technology, we set the benchmark for and reliability. It has a total transport capacity of up transport systems geared to the future. Your trust in to 5,500 PPH and cabins for up to 38 passengers. our capabilities and products motivates us to provide 3S ropeways are characterized by very high wind you with top performance every time. As your partner stability, low energy consumption and the capability to we take pride in our reliability. cope with very long rope spans. Infinitely adjustable travel speeds of up to 8.5 m/s are possible. Our proven tricable gondola detachable (TGD) rope- ways combine the benefits of gondola lift and reversible aerial tramway. The result is technical perfection. This 3S system has two fixed, fully locked track ropes on We set the benchmark for ropeway technology geared to the future 4|5 3S Gondola Lifts The pinnacle of technology, performance and reliability The 3S lifts in Sölden and Koblenz were the first to All functionally relevant parts and equipment are du- incorporate the Doppelmayr/Garaventa recovery con- plicated and independent of one another. Thanks to cept, which allows passengers to stay in the cabins this concept, it is now possible to realize ropeway pro- in the event of a lift malfunction.
    [Show full text]
  • Cable-Propelled People Movers in Urban Environments
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1349 125 Cable-Propelled People Movers in Urban Environments EDWARD s. NEUMANN Cable-propelled people mover systems have been studied and vehicle by means of the cable, the velocity of which deter­ implemented in a variety of urban applicati n ·, including airp ns, mines the velocity of the vehicle. This moving cable commonly downtowns feeders to regional transit, feeders to remote park­ is referred to as a haul rope. The drive motor or motors for ing, internal circulation in large developments, and leisure facil­ the cable are located at one of the terminals and usually are ities. A family of technologies exists that offers a wide range of performance and de ign characteristics. The features and appli­ DC motors. The cable that moves the vehicle is wrapped cation potential of the various technologies, as well as experience around one or more large wheels called drive bullwheels, to date, are discussed, and a classification system that groups which are linked to the drive motor either directly by a shaft technologies by service type (reversible, co ntinuous, and pul ed), or via a speed-reducing gearbox. ca~acity of transpon unit, and method of support is presented. Tension is maintained in the cable either by weights or by Alignment features , velocity, gradability, capacity, and costs are hydraulic or pneumatic tensioning devices that act on one of compared. Specific urban sites are referenced. the bullwheels. The tension placed on the bullwheel creates Previous research indicates that installation of automated peo­ friction along the points of contact between the cable and ple movers (APMs) in development projects has represented surface of the groove in the bullwheel, which permits the force about 7 percent of the total project costs, which is close to developed at the rim of the bullwheel to be transferred to the but lower than typical elevator costs for developments (1).
    [Show full text]
  • NSAA Ski Lift Safety Fact Sheet
    CONTACT: Adrienne Saia Isaac Director of Marketing & Communications [email protected] (720) 963-4217 office UPDATED: December 2018 NSAA Ski Lift Safety Fact Sheet In the 2017/18 season, ski lifts and aerial tramways transported a total of 53.3 million skiers a total of 200 million miles. The last guest fatality resulting from a mechanical malfunction of a ski lift occurred in the 2016/17 season. Since 2004, there have been three fatalities resulting from falls from chairlifts unrelated to mechanical malfunctions. A passenger is five times more likely to suffer a fatality riding an elevator than a ski lift, and more than eight times more likely to suffer a fatality riding in a car than on a ski lift. Lift maintenance, safety and operation is governed by ANSI B77 and regulated in many states by a state agency. Overview Aerial ropeways (including lifts, trams, and gondolas) remain one of the safest methods of transportation. Ski areas across the United States are committed to lift safety and have an excellent safety record for uphill transportation as a result of this commitment. There is no other transportation system that is as safely operated, with so few injuries and fatalities, as the uphill transportation provided by chairlifts at ski resorts in the United States. Methodology & Terms NSAA compiles lift incident information and updates this Ski Lift Safety Fact Sheet annually to provide ski areas and the public with the most current information on the ski industry’s commitment to overall lift safety, financial investment in lifts and lift maintenance, industry education and training on lifts, and frequently asked questions about chairlifts.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual
    TCRP Web Document 6 (Project A-15) Contractor’s Final Report Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual Prepared for Transit Cooperative Research Program Transportation Research Board National Research Council Submitted by Kittelson & Associates, Inc. In association with Texas Transportation Institute Transport Consulting Limited January 1999 ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work was sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and was conducted through the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP), which is administered by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Research Council. DISCLAIMER The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in the report are those of the research agency. They are not necessarily those of the TRB, the National Research Council, the FTA, the Transit Development Corporation, or the U.S. Government. This report has not been edited by TRB. Information on this report is available from the TCRP, 2101 Constitution Ave. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20418 Telephone: 202/334-3502 Fax: 202/334-2006 Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual TABLE OF CONTENTS Report Organization.........................................................................................................viii Foreword............................................................................................................................ix Acknowledgments..............................................................................................................xi PART 1: INTRODUCTION AND CONCEPTS 1. TRANSIT IN NORTH AMERICA
    [Show full text]